Astron. Astrophys. 349, 169-176 (1999)
4. Asymmetric eclipse curve of SY Mus
It is important to note that our time of mid-eclipse is not based
on the light curve shape but on RV measurements. This is a crucial
point because we intend to study asymmetries in the eclipse curve.
4.1. Column density of neutral hydrogen
During ingress and egress we observe attenuation at wavelengths
due to Rayleigh scattering and a
second opacity source of up to now unknown origin. This second source
of opacity has already been described in Pereira et
al. (1995).
In Fig. 3, we show the continuum variation at
and
. At 1325 Å Rayleigh
scattering efficiency is very high, getting smaller towards longer
wavelengths. The eclipse curve is clearly asymmetric with respect to
the phase of central eclipse. At ingress a sharp flux reduction starts
at . The reappearance of the hot
continuum is less steep and continues until approximately
.
![[FIGURE]](img74.gif) |
Fig. 3. Measured flux in SY Mus at (filled diamonds) and (open diamonds) as a function of orbital phase . Vertical lines delimit the phases of geometric eclipse (solid) and the uncertainty for the time of central eclipse (dotted). Flux in units of erg cm-2 s- 1 Å-1.
|
We determine the column densities of neutral hydrogen,
, with a similar approach as the one
adopted by Pereira et al. (1995). We rewrite their Eq. 3
![[EQUATION]](img77.gif)
The term models an additional
opacity source in a wavelength independent way, as the IUE low
resolution spectra do not allow a more detailed approach. We use the
spectrum SWP56762 observed at as
reference spectrum . This spectrum
does not yet show attenuation due to Rayleigh scattering. In addition
it is least affected by nebular emission, as it is taken close to the
onset of the eclipse.
By fitting the ingress and egress variation with Eq. 2, we derive
the column densities and additional
optical depths (Table 5). The
error in the derived column density of neutral hydrogen is estimated
to be of the order of . At low and
high column densities the uncertainties tend to be even larger. This
error does not include systematic effects due to line blanketing
discussed in Sect. 5. For those IUE spectra we have in common with
Pereira et al. (1999), we find agreement within the error bars.
In Fig. 4 the column densities are plotted as a function of the impact
parameter b, given by
![[EQUATION]](img83.gif)
The orbital inclination of SY Mus is
(Harries & Howarth 1996)
and the stellar separation is , or in
units of the M-giant radius (Schmutz
et al. 1994) .
![[FIGURE]](img88.gif) |
Fig. 4. Column density of neutral hydrogen in SY Mus as a function of impact parameter b, open squares ingress data, solid squares egress data. Upper and lower limits are indicated by arrows. b in units of M-giant radii. The triangle marks the column density derived from the SWP10188L spectrum, for which the phase relative to the other observations depends on the adopted period.
|
![[TABLE]](img98.gif)
Table 5. Column density of neutral hydrogen and the optical depth in SY Mus according to Eq. 2 as a function of orbital phase , and impact parameter b (in units of M-giant radii). The errors of are of the order of 50%..
Notes:
1) SWP10188L
Fig. 4 shows that the column density of neutral hydrogen in
SY Mus is clearly asymmetric with respect to mid-eclipse.
4.2. Mass-loss rate and wind acceleration
Because the density distribution around SY Mus is not
symmetric, we model the ingress and egress column densities separately
with two independent, semi-spherically symmetric solutions for the
volume density
![[EQUATION]](img99.gif)
where is the mass-loss rate of the
M-giant, and the velocity in units
of the terminal velocity . For a
neutral wind which consists mainly of hydrogen, the mean atomic weight
is . The total column density of
hydrogen along the line of sight l is then given by
![[EQUATION]](img103.gif)
where b and r are in units of the M-giant radius
. The parameter a is defined
by
![[EQUATION]](img105.gif)
We want to solve Eq. 5 for the velocity law
. According to Knill et
al. (1993), it is particularly advantageous to expand the
function into a Taylor series
![[EQUATION]](img107.gif)
as the velocity law, , is then
given by
![[EQUATION]](img108.gif)
with the constants recursively
defined by
![[EQUATION]](img110.gif)
Due to the limited orbital coverage and limited precision of the
column densities, a unique determination of the velocity profile is
not possible. Therefore, we reduce Eq. 7 to the first term
( ) and one term of order
. Thus we rewrite Eq. 7 into
![[EQUATION]](img113.gif)
and Eq. 8 reduces to
![[EQUATION]](img114.gif)
The factors ,
, and the exponent k in Eq. 11
are our fit parameters.
Eq. 10 requires that we know the total column density of hydrogen
as a function of impact parameter b. In symbiotic binaries a
fraction of the wind is ionized by the hot star. Thus the measured
column densities of neutral hydrogen can be substantially smaller than
the total column density of hydrogen.
During egress of SY Mus, there is a region around
where
(see Fig. 5). From
to
, there is a sudden drop in the
column density of neutral hydrogen (see Fig. 5). In the following we
model this behaviour by a wind that has reached terminal velocity at
, with
, and is substantially ionized at
impact parameters . From the sudden
decrease in column density we also deduce that the transition from
mainly neutral to mainly ionized hydrogen is almost instantaneous.
Thus, the amount of ionized material at
is negligible, and our measured
column density of neutral hydrogen
at is close to the total column
density of hydrogen .
![[FIGURE]](img138.gif) |
Fig. 5. Column density of neutral hydrogen during egress. The solid line gives the fit according to Eq. 10, with the fit parameters , , , , the dashed line belongs to , .
|
The first term in Eq. 10 and Eq. 11 is the dominant term for large
b values, and corresponds to the solution of a stellar wind
with constant expansion velocity ,
where the volume density is proportional to
. A total column density of hydrogen
of at
, where the first term in Eq. 10
dominates, leads to
![[EQUATION]](img142.gif)
which yields
![[EQUATION]](img143.gif)
Typical terminal velocities for
M-giant winds from molecular absorption band analysis are in the range
. In the following we adopt
This implies a mass-loss rate for
the M-giant in SY Mus of
![[EQUATION]](img146.gif)
The second term in Eq. 10 and Eq. 11 is the dominant term for small
impact parameters. It determines where the acceleration of the M-giant
wind takes place. The best fit parameters for the second term in
Eq. 10 are and
(see Fig. 5). The resulting
velocity profile is shown in Fig. 6.
![[FIGURE]](img157.gif) |
Fig. 6. Velocity profile as derived from egress data. The solid line gives the velocity law for , the dashed line for . The velocity is given in units of , the distance from the M-giant is given in units of the its radius . The dotted line gives a possible wind solution for the ingress data.
|
If we assume, that for column densities
, ionization becomes significant,
the ingress data does not allow to derive a mass-loss rate (see
Fig. 4). Assuming the mass-loss rate derived from the egress data, we
find and
, with large uncertainties. The wind
acceleration then takes place at
(see Fig. 6).
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999
Online publication: August 25, 1999
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |